[2009] KEHC 1243 (KLR)
The court found that the petitioners had complied with the procedural requirements for withdrawal of an election petition under Rules 23 and 24 of the National Assembly Elections (Election Petition) Rules, 1993. The 1st respondent filed the necessary affidavits, and the 2nd and 3rd respondents' advocate provided a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2009] KEHC 1243 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Roselyne Adhiambo Ochieng; Applicant: Charles Otieno Atula; Applicant: Mary Wangui Nderitu; Respondent: Ferdinand Ndung'u Waititu; Respondent: Electoral Commission of Kenya; Respondent: Fred N Mutua
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Election Petition 33 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Election Petition / Application for Withdrawal of Petition
- Outcome
- Petition withdrawn with leave; costs awarded to respondents.
- Judges
- A Ali-Aroni
- Legal Topics
- Withdrawal of Election Petition, Costs Award, Procedural Compliance
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Roselyne Adhiambo Ochieng
Applicant
Charles Otieno Atula
Applicant
Mary Wangui Nderitu
Applicant
Ferdinand Ndung'u Waititu
Respondent
Electoral Commission of Kenya
Respondent
Fred N Mutua
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Election Petition / Application for Withdrawal of Petition
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioners should be granted leave to withdraw the election petition.
- 2 Whether the respondents are entitled to costs upon withdrawal of the petition.
- 3 Whether procedural requirements for withdrawal have been satisfied.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the petitioners had complied with the procedural requirements for withdrawal of an election petition under Rules 23 and 24 of the National Assembly Elections (Election Petition) Rules, 1993. The 1st respondent filed the necessary affidavits, and the 2nd and 3rd respondents' advocate provided a satisfactory explanation for the absence of affidavits, which the court accepted under Rule 23(2). Having considered the submissions of all parties, the court granted leave for the withdrawal of the petition and awarded costs to the respondents, in line with established legal principles regarding withdrawal and costs.
Court Disposition
Petition withdrawn with leave; costs awarded to respondents.
Orders
- Leave is granted to the petitioners to withdraw the petition.
- Costs are awarded to the respondents.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
Election Petition 33 of 2008
ROSELYNE ADHIAMBO OCHIENG................1ST PETITIONER
CHARLES OTIENO ATULA..............................2ND PETITIONER
MARY WANGUI NDERITU................................3RD PETITIONER
VERSUS
FERDINARD NDUNGWAITITU.....................1ST RESPONDENT
ELECTRORAL COMMISSION OF KENYA.2ND RESPONDENT
FRED N MUTUA...............................................3RD RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The application before me is dated the 25th of September, 2009 brought pursuant to Rules 23 & 24 of the National Assembly Elections (Election Petition) Rules, 1993. Seeking leave to have the 1st, 2nd and third Petitioners withdraw the petition.
2. The 1st Respondent and his Advocate Mr Kioko Kilukumi filed affidavits in compliance with Rule 23 & 24 of the said Rules.
3. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents did not file replying affidavits Mr. Gikonyofor the 2nd and 3rd Respondent informed the Court that the Chairman of the (IIEC) Interim Independent Electoral Commission has been out of the country.
4 He urged the Court to dispense with the affidavit pursuant to Rule 23 (2) of the said Rules.
5. Having heard submissions by learned counsel for the parties, I hereby order as follows:-
1. Leave be and is hereby granted to the Petitioners to withdraw the Petition.
2. I award costs to the Respondents.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 6th day of November, 2009.
ALI- ARONI
JUDGE
6/11/2009
Ruling delivered in the presence
…………………………… for Petitioners
………………………….. for 1st Respondent
………………………… for 2nd and 3rd Respondents